"in a digital world value does not derive from rarity but from ubiquity." (Ex 1, 1a)

"Recommend: Heterogeneity of outputs-economic model of publishing. Synergistic effect-digital also helps with traditional publishing." (Day 1, 1a)

"May be skeptic: traditional trained humanist, wrote article about a year ago about humanists and technology-they're doing stuff but still facing a lot of tech challenges. Elephant in room: use of tech is anathema to culture-not collaborative, not good for getting tenure if you spend time on technology." (Day 1, 1a)

"held hostage by commercial publishers, & we have the power to do something about that" (Ex 1, 1b-B)

"loosen the grip of commercial publishers on academic work, and in general tackle issues of access and control over resources, data, tools, technology" (Ex 1, 1b-B)

"Can we contribute open-knowledge content across institutions that we can then use in lieu of purchasing a CD of stuff that my institution must have, but has not assembled for re-use." (Ex 1, 1b-C)

"Larger Library budgets are going to science journals - taking out humanities purchases. SPARK and Open Access. Bamboo can help disseminate, archive, publish scholarly production." (Ex 1, 1b-E)

"Other formats could be legitimate forms of accreditions. Economic world of Uni Presses is altering, how does that impact the humanities departments?" (Ex 1, 1b-E)

"Between Humanities and a larger public. Very worthwhile." (Ex 1, 1b-F)

"Advance the conversation about how disciplines should engage with the rest of the academy and with the world outside the academy" (Ex 1, 1b-F)

"What are the distinctions between enclaving something and opening it up? Technology can facilitate. Certain sides can benefit by openness while others should not be exposed, but who gets to decide this? Can making something too available result in an alternate kind of enclaving?" (Ex 1, 1c-B)

"Electronic world is a new thing; we're used to dealing w/ books, but then again our paper citation system depends on redundancy of publication, and this might be lost as people get rid of paper copies of journals" (Ex 1, 1c-E)

"IP is one of the issues. Negotiate with press is a major stumbling block. To publish introduced issues. Not just sorting, keeping, using, what use can we make" (Ex 1, 1d-B)

"People's perceptions differ between digital/print and just digital. Irrational pushback to born-digital good scholarship" (Ex 1, 1d-E)

"Exist peer-reviewed online-only journals, but I don't know any. The ones I use are available both ways." (Ex 1, 1d-E)

"Need to take public scholarship, public humanities seriously" (Ex 1, 1d-G)

"Organization and professional systems that works against collaboration and sharing. The value and the rewards system by yourself/institution. We believe in sharing, but do the institutions interested in supporting the work? Hard to get things on the backs of already hard working people." (Ex 1, 1d-H)

"How it fits into larger structural shifts in scholarly communication, open access, engaging multiple publics." (Day 2, 1a)

"Publish research (papers, etc.)" (Ex 2, 1a-A)

"Publishing research in multimedia form. Multimedia sounds like the past. Subtasks: finding media selecting and using them; identifying most-effective means (media, patform, format) for communicating an idea (argument or point). A lot of the terms are technology oriented? How can we come up with more distinctive humanistic terms?; Is a novel a piece of data? Identifying unit of analysis is related to methodology" (Ex 2, 1a-B)

"Presenting current work. This is the flip side of finding - exposing. For Z8, not an issue since measure and communication is still on paper, not on web. For Z6, web present is very important. Way to gather new students, etc. For Z6, need to leverage technology well, so either must look really professional, or she feels bad about putting it up." (Ex 2, 1a-C)

"Maintaining presence in community. Need to keep visibility up, for a host of crass reasons as well as good ones (to draw interesting partner, students, etc.)." (Ex 2, 1a-C)

"Marketing work. Verb is ugly, but there is a need to gather presentations together, etc. to submit to venues, propose work, etc." (Ex 2, 1a-C)

"Represent research: could be a written record, an animation or other visualization -- some way to present it to others. Not just sharing data, but sharing one's particular take on the data. Archives of conference papers, electronic working papers like the sciences do. Registry of research activities as part of this social networking activity -- pre-print, awareness of area of work and particular argument, approach, methodology. " (Ex 2, 1a-C)

"Share things: dissemination: sharing, publishing, releasing, exchanging things: These go together" (Ex 2, 1a-E)

"Sharing = exchange; publishing = one-way; memory = capture, create, archive; synthesis: explore, identify promise, represent what you're doing" (Ex 2, 1a-E)

"a repository of "dead ends". journal of digital disasters." (Ex 2, 1a-F)

"Put down a flag in your field, staking your claim. Digital material made available can be the mode of staking that claim." (Ex 2, 1a-F)

"In terms of information, we have various challenges in getting information out. Could do better. Get someone to build and publish code. Put it up on web, say come and use it - and develop it! Does not work." (Ex 2, 1c-A)

""Well, that's the trick!" Difficult in filtering is the major problem in disseminating content. " (Ex 2, 1c-B)

"Recognizing the knowledge of the people who came before you. It'd be nice if your next colleague could take advantage of what you discovered. Some people said this is terrible, I don't want people to know what I'm working on because this is research in progress. "I just found this by serendipity, I don't want you to find it too." Paranoia in my field is breaking down. Used to be, "can't put unpublished documents on the web, people will steal them!" But hasn't been one case where someone published something without asking permission first" (Ex 2, 1d-A)

"Humanities Scholars feel they need to know more than they do" (Ex 2, 1d-C)

"publish in print and conference presentations ("non-linear multimedia presentation" - digitized media and digitized text, all essays have begun as presentations; multimedia archive projects - video archive and video annotation. believes that most digital humanities projects do form the basis of scholarly research. doesn't consider himself computer savvy, but is media savvy -- manages his own system" (Ex 2, 1d-C)

"ongoing dissemination: develop & release scholarly tools, recognition, work is connected with and used by appreciative audience, solutions, distribute/promote knowledge important to me" (Ex 3, 1b-A)

"Disseminate to diverse constituencies." (Ex 3, 1c-A)

"Give back. Similar to dissemination, but different. Pay subject for time and work. Useful to own research career, too. Give back in negotiated value." (Ex 3, 1c-A)

"Communicate a more (publish) or less (looking for feedback) complete knowledge." (Ex 3, 1c-A)

"Dissemination of findings, both to colleagues and academics, and to those whom he studies. Disseminate to diverse constituencies. ("publics, communitites")" (Ex 3, 1c-A)

"Impact of one's research, and its effects, are things we're often asked to report on. More pressure to come up with ways to report effects. New ways of reporting this would be something important to find. Most will be reluctant about finding new ways, though there's more pressure to do this. Administered by questionnaire that will sometimes query motives. Assessing impact of scholarly activity. This type of activity seems to be common, but is it a theme? Important to scholars, to funder." (Ex 3, 1c-B)

"How to define the types of contents that need to be made available to scholarly community, in that it's something they want? Something that gains maximum benefit with funds." (Ex 2, 1c-B)

"Dissemination or outreach? Dissemination is not interactive enough." (Ex 3, 1c-B)

"Those in the humanities believe they are creating materials that will then be acquired." (Ex 3, 1c-B)

"Unrestricted or minimally restricted information through sharing of materials, drawing on a wider range of sources and media (including people and places previously not considered authoritative). Technologically mediated approach where the relationship between the user and the raw data is a seamless as possible" (Ex 3, 1d-C)

"Another form of uncommon collaboration is "taking control" of dissemination, through graduated levels of access - from "core" participants to the public. Stands in contrast to ceding control over dissemination to traditional publishing process. "Community lead release of information." (Ex 3, 1d-B)

"sustainablity leads into problem of credit. if i make a copy, original site can't track usage. example of one copy going to blackboard, 500 untracked copies go out..." (Ex 3, 1d-F)

"[I have] A colleague with [a database] of 5000 women writers in China, with references to the writings. [A] new librarian decides "we don't want to support this". What's the clearinghouse to support dissemination if a project loses support? We need to solve the dissemination problem. (Ex 3, 1d-F)

"publishing was in two forms, books and articles. now there's creation of databases. story of a colleague with db of 5000 women writers in china, with references to the writings. new librarian decides "we don't want to support this". what's the clearinghouse to support dissemination if a project loses support? we need to solve the dissemination problem. used to be the case with print that withdrawal of support would cease production. in digital existing effort can disappear." (Ex 3, 1d-F)

"Publication by other means - exposing. A way of covering for a set of practices that are really out of date. In web environment we have no problem w/ rapid turnover but a stumbling block for colleagues who are not used to an iterative, refining process. The other step is going to something interpretive and publishing results. Means something different than a conventional humanities journal." (Ex 3, 1d-G)

"a thing that is little-studied is of more value than something that has been thoroughly chewed over" (Ex 4, 1b-C)

"They want Bamboo to create community of scholars---critical mass- to tackle issue of authority and validation in the academy (in relation to digital publishing)." (Ex 4, 1b-D)

"All participants also expressed horror at the prevailing prejudice in the academy against digital production. Tenure rules need to be changed, professors need to take digital publishing and production seriously. This group saw Bamboo as a project that will REVOLUTIONIZE and ALTER the humanities academy today. This is the promise of Bamboo. The academy needs to move (pushed by Bb) into a model closer to the sciences (in relation to technology). " (Ex 4, 1b-D)

"Libraries are also creating new works. Indexing, curating, metadata etc. Are all intellectual work going into that process. Libraries should push the fair use envelope. Some publishers allow self-publishing on faculty own's site." (Ex 4, 1b-E)

"JDs need to be hired in Libraries to provide information for faculty. Faculty can be educated on how to protect their IP and re-negotiate the contracts with publishers." (Ex 4, 1b-E)

"Scholarly publication in the Libraries was there to protect the scholar. There is a tension between the University and the Scholar and their rights." (Ex 4, 1b-E)

"Intellectual Property often stymies original work - in digital formats. Whats going to happen when university scholars start putting up edgy stuff and a cease and desist letters. Will the uni. stand behind them? Bamboo will have 3 problems: Using copyrighted work, creating new work from copyrighted works, policing copyright itself. Faculty want to know how much risk they can take? A License which would be used for making scholarship." (Ex 4, 1b-E)

"If you're writing a book, you're trying to make a piece of cultural production that meets expectations of your audience. You may have to take another try, or you may have contributed to the field. Perceiving regularities and acting as much as you can according to what you perceive as customary; you succeed or fail. can be emphasis on regularities or irregularities. Latter can actually lead to shifts in common expectation / norms." (Ex 4, 1c-A)

"resistance and/or capacity limitation to new media types 6 images for a 400 page document" (Ex 4, 1d-C)

"how we publish is based on existing systems, but there is also the work that exists before the journal article is written" (Ex 4, 1d-C)

"law blogs getting cited (case law volumes are themselves an ongoing scholarly conversation)" (Ex 5, 1b-B)

"Make one's scholarly product available "for free" ... employ open forms of distribution ... "give stuff away" ... "don't insist on getting the maximum tenure bang for your buck" -- but how to make that a more general practice, and not an isolated practice ... perhaps use of humanities zines and blogs instead of scholarly journals is a practice that will catch on as it is exercises." (Ex 5, 1b-C)

""I would smash the paradigm of print" ... the concept that ideas must be packaged in alphanumeric printed and bound text in order to be legitimate ... and perhaps one can preserve print while allowing alternatives to print to become more valuable ... so it's not smashed, per se, its hegemony is just dialectically challenged" (Ex 5, 1b-C)

"Hubble data - one person's waste data is another person's valuable data. Also people sharing a patient - you've already got em', so when you do your e.g. FMRI scan, please also do x, since we don't get enough of that kind of patient at our location to do x test." (Ex 5, 1b-E)

"I don't have graduate students, but observations at other institutions I've been affiliated with indicate that students are not in a push for completion time, but for tenure. Students want and are encouraged to write a statement of purpose. This is what I'm going to do for graduate project; this is how you get in, not so you can complete but so you can get a job. To be competitive you have to move quickly, be focused, publish, present." (Ex 5, 1c-A)

"Part of the change is that the idea of IP is fundamentally changing. Staking and claiming. Now there is a push to open up the data much earlier because this is the fundamental way people are working. Not altruistic. Engineers make money by starting companies. Humanities are rewarded by publishing a book, glory of the book. We are at the cusp of a reward system changing for humanities. Want to understand how releasing data earlier is better. Political and economic motivations. Open access initiatives. Social justice. Idealogical ideals are pervasive. When you make it more widely available things can change. Not generational. Purely rational. In some fields in a competitive environment if you share it's stupid. This will persist. Zero sum gain in humanities funding. NEH panel grant and another incorporates your ideas, they will win. Normtive political philosophy. You can't pursuade an NPP to put up a blog. Social documentation and human rights archives tend to share, others don't. I have a friend transitioned out of teaching put everything up on line for commentary. After tenure there is still promotion. Insiders have access to personal contacts. Substantial correlation between willingness and marginality. Fringe ideologs and those who are concerned with promotion. What is the middle group." (Ex 6a, 1a-C)

"Lots of students blog heavily in their earlier yrs to engage, but when people get more invested in their own research there's a bit of fear, including of things being taken out of context. Don't want someone saying "a UCB researcher says...". Can get someone in trouble. Also, when look back at things written in earlier years, can be embarrassed." (Ex 6a, 1a-D)

"When have to build your credentials, people think they better not share so much. If a requirement of a dissertation is to prove novelty, there's a disincentive to share. As grads move along, they more conform to the expectations of their professor. We did a study of collaboration in humanities. Found post-docs were open to the idea of collaboration despite dissertations, etc. People are very choosy about who they share with. There's an intergenerational model on publishing. There's a back-an-forth interdependency: You might now depend on a GIS grad student in order to do a degree in a different dept." (Ex 6a, 1a-D)

"Also trepidation to share too much? Disincentives to share as credentialing progresses?" (Ex 6a, 1a-F)

"Do you think it's the publicizing of that that's different? So for example that you can do it with strangers, internationally...because we used to have these discussions around the proverbial water cooler. People will come at 2am to look at it." (Ex 6a, 1b-C)

"Research has become more fragmentary, in process, and work-in-progress. And people are fine with that." (Ex 6a, 1b-C)

"In same ways, we are in a kind of valley at the moment." We had procedures for printing and producing content. As these older procedures are being replaced, new standards of working intellectually need to be established." (Ex 6a, 1c-B)

"No one more concerned about premature publishing of things they want to submit for publication than students in humanities. Willing to blog, but publishing what they're thinking about > paranoid about idea being stolen. People think "because this is true, I must get this out in attributive form as soon as possible, then rework" - credit first. Traditional work comes from face-to-face trust; they know the other person won't do that to them" (Ex 6a, 1c-C)

"Research: 1) people want to present in ways that match new pedagogy; 2) Doing research - different thing that more materials are electronic. Have to acknowledge distinction between doing/presenting research" (Ex 6a, 1c-C)

"I opened open journal to the campus and only the grad students are using them, but they've created 4 journals producing good scholarship." (Ex 6a, 1d-A)

"When I meet with grad students, I sense a greater anxiety about getting published earlier than when I was in grad school" (Ex 6a, 1d-D)

"Any generalizations about why anxiety is greater? Job market has created a huge category of non-tenure-track lines; allows a post-graduate to spend more years in the teaching field before they get to a tenure-track job. They have more publications by then, make outcoming grad students less competitive. Increasing expectation of two books in humanities field. Demand for publishing on administrative P&T side is leading to a lot of production. Business models vs. academic; trying to run a university as a business means tenure-track is not profitable; reducing tenured/tenure-track positions. I agree; also driven by job market (perceived/real assumptions about hireability) -Younger grad students/librarians/etc. come in with a greater sense of empowerment, facility, frustration with not getting stuff done sooner -Access to means of production/tools at hand more -"Should you be blogging about your work?", different conversation than among older faculty; different set of norms -Less hanging back, being socialized/normalized into a profession -Comfort with visibility/public-ness skewed young/grown up in an environment of Facebook, MySpace, blogs, etc. -More willing to stumble in public; willingness to show ambiguity. Important to establish niche earlier; so many niches are public. Technology helps you find something uncommon and interesting to make your mark. Use of technology means there's an audience for you sooner -Earlier, the beginning of your grad school is very localized, maybe a couple conferences, slow network building -Now you can set up direct contacts; end up more prominent more quickly" (Ex 6a, 1d-D)

"in archeology profs who've developed web sites and blogs for students at expense of publishing, denied tenure as a result" (Ex 6a, 1d-E)

"Strong community of a dozen people w/ tenure who will reward ... Problem is people produced are for a 20th century world - single author articles for established publications. The higher the level the administration is the less resistant; it's the department level that has to support and sometimes don't. Weird dichotomy between established programs and incoming faculty." (Ex 6a, 1d-F)

"What is the role of the library vs. the publisher? -- S1 responds that his library is becoming a publisher, At Penn State the publisher is under the library, Melbourne is heading that way as well and more towards commercial publishing -- this was being pushed for by younger scholars who wanted online publishing under Melbourne name, print on demand volume actually made money! Doesn't cost much on the University's budget, all the work is done by the scholars (just have servers and archiving)" (Ex 6a, 1d-G)

"How do we back out of these mashups to get back to the original data? And how do you give people relative credit (Big issue for tenure)" (Ex 6b, 1a-D)

"[since] a requirement of a dissertation is to prove novelty, there's a disincentive to share". (Ex 6b, 1a-G)

"Academics have privileged rights that we're not asserting. University libraries, main subscribers to journals etc, yet we provide material they're publishing then get screwed to buy it back. Market isn't just access to materials, but certification market. This is part of how we get screwed - confused there's 2 different products at stake. As soon as P&T committees stop paying attention to it, but if they don't it won't change" (Ex 6b, 1c-C)

"Public presentation of scholarly results, more transparency " (Ex 6b, 1d-F)

"Coordinated by Deborah Kimmey (PhC, English, University of Washingon Seattle), the website is a partnership between NYU Press and the UW Simpson Center for the Humanities. Using the same platform as wikipedia, the site contains a main page designed to introduce users to the book and the site (, a blog where discussions of related conference panels and other events occur (;, and collaboratories where classes and working groups may develop keywords projects of their own ( As co-editors of Keywords for American Cultural Studies, Burgett and Hendler had several reasons for developing the website. As they stress in the introduction to the book, keyword projects do more than map existing fields of knowledge (or tag knowledge networks). They also invite and encourage future work. The trouble with books is that they tend to be read as summaries of knowledge made by their authors, not as provocations to further research and reflection. The advantage of interactive websites like this one is that they can house, archive, and inspire new inquiries and collaborations. This insight is critical to the cultural studies methodology the book and website deploy. This methodological emphasis on the importance of ongoing reflection and collaboration is the reason Raymond Williams included blank pages at the back of his Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society, the earlier book from which Keywords for American Cultural Studies drew its title and inspiration. Williams thought of those blank pages as a sign to readers that the inquiry contained in his book remained open. The website is a technologically updated version of those pages." (SN-0040 Keywords for American Cultural Studies -- Website and Collaboratories, Bruce Burgett, 1/5/09)

"Many forms of activity: scholarly communication that doesn't correspond to publishing in press context. Scholarly dialog/exchange of ideas. "Projects" conceived around opportunities for exchange of ideas." (W3, Perspectives: Scholarly Practice, Anthony Cascardi, Director, Townsend Center for the Humanities)

Bamboo tags: 

Add new comment